Is there a transitional taking place from mass society to information society or network society?
Yes, there is certainly a transitional taking place, in which mass society cultivate one-way media and centralized identities, consequently information and network societies harvest multi-directional media and decentralized organizations. Mass society evolves around communities – shared identities – while, network societies are empowered by individuals – those who are linked by networks. The first one extends its wealth through strong ties with others, and the latter one through weak ties; these aspects are inherently linked to the impact of communication, of which the mass society through its strong ties uses face-to-face communication in comparison with the information and network society that use intermediated communication more often. However, it is strongly believed that both cannot be separated and are combined extensively (van Dijk. 2006). This is not limited to only communication, the types of organization are becoming increasingly intertwined – extend beyond horizontal coordination and vertical control of activities – as well.
Network and its characteristics
Van Dijk (2006) defines networks as a collection of links between elements of a unit. Units are often called systems, and a single link of two elements is called a relationship; networks are a mode of organization of complex systems in nature and society.
Castells (2004) argues that a network has no center. I contest this argument within the discipline of network marketing a.k.a. multi-channel or -level marketing, in which the center [of the pyramid/scheme] is represented by an organization or identity that initiated the scheme, and thus enables the flow of data and products to new actors joining the scheme; its structure is hierarchical; top-down; and, there are numerous ways to employ these schemes. In this assignment I shall not discuss the schemes’ sustainability.
Further, at least six levels of networks of which the most important ones – in relation to the course Network Societies – that can be identified, are social, technical and media networks. Networks characterize the relation of elements, and provide order to those who partake in the system. Networks are complicated ways of organizing matter and living systems. The type of network is determined by its history, players, organizations, relationships and interaction within its societies at large; based on these determinants, each network has differentiated characteristics, but all networks support a basic level of involvement (individual); they could gradually enhance by moving up some levels (group, societal, global) which inherently incorporate new characteristics such as collectivities and bureaucracies that pertain to each level.
Other network characteristics are:
• their cooperation and competition between networks
• their infinitive distance
• their survivability
• their self-reconfigurability
• their constitution of patterns of life
• their flexibility and scalability
How are networked modes of sociality different from other models?
The networked modes of sociality portrayed the cultural social movements of the 60s and 70s and illustrated the culture of personal freedom and social autonomy (Castells. 2004) of which capitalism and statism find themselves on the other end of the spectrum.
The main differences were that they were interlinked with civil rights movements, and marked an era of cultural diversity and the affirmation of minorities.
What are the advantages of “non-hierarchical networks over vertical-hierarchical systems?”
In a non-hierarchical network the basic levels are only partially connected in the higher levels. The pertaining units contain relations and structures that overlap with those at higher level. The main advantage of such structure is that it allows a more flexible organization and interaction between the ‘actors’ in the system (Kontopoulos, 1993), and the empowerment of specific levels is not determined by the ‘height’ of the level; there’s less autonomy and more multidirectionality and a continuous flow of interactive information processing (Castells. 2004).
On the contrary, vertical-hierarchical systems are just that what non-hierarchical networks are not. Basic levels are fully integrated in the higher levels, and thus higher levels supersede the previous ones, which feeds the empowerment of the higher levels above the lower ones. The system is more rigid, and as such does not necessarily cultivate smooth transitions.
By answering these questions, I have acknowledged that I have provided a more descriptive than critical synopsis apart from my experience in marketing.
No comments:
Post a Comment